Efficiency and cost-effectiveness

7.2.1 Extent to which CCAMLR is efficiently and effectively managing its human and financial resources, including those of the Secretariat

Recommendation

Responsible body

Activities to date

Status

7.2.1.1 Although current resources may be sufficient to cope with CCAMLR’s core operations, major new initiatives and the recommendations of this RP in such areas as Conservation and Management and Compliance and Enforcement, will inevitably have additional resource implications. This matter needs to be considered against the ongoing policy of zero real growth. There may well be instances which require additional Member contributions to meet such priorities.

Alternatively, as it has become customary in recent years, it may be necessary for the Commission to identify high-priority items and then allocate additional funds for these items specifically in excess of the zero-growth threshold. Without such an approach, the RP considered that CCAMLR’s capacity to address new initiatives may well be constrained.

7.2.1.2 The Commission should consider how it might provide enhanced support to the work undertaken by SC-CAMLR. At present there is an over-reliance on relatively few Members who undertake the relevant scientific research needed to support the work of CCAMLR. This situation may mean that CCAMLR’s capacity to meet future research requirements will be limited. To offset this, it is recommended that CCAMLR should investigate the means to ensure a more equitable contribution to scientific research from all CCAMLR Members.

7.2.1.3 CCAMLR Members should renew efforts to encourage their scientists to engage in SC-CAMLR and in research in the Convention Area. The adoption and implementation of a significant number of recommendations from this Review will necessarily require a substantial increase in the allocation of financial and human resources.

7.2.1.4 The Commission should consider how it might address the issue of succession planning to ensure the continuity of function and the transfer of essential institutional knowledge when senior and long-serving Secretariat staff members leave the organisation.

7.2.2 Extent to which the schedule and organisation of the meetings could be improved

Recommendation

Responsible body

Activities to date

Status

7.2.2.1 To guarantee equality, transparency and the widest participation possible at meetings, the RP recommended that the current budget assigned to translation and interpretation work must be maintained and if necessary increased.

7.2.2.2 In order to improve the administrative mechanisms of CCAMLR meetings, the RP was of the view that any duplication of work carried out by the Standing Committees and the Plenary of the Commission should be avoided.

SCAF – In progress – well advanced
New meeting structure trialled in 2012 and 2013.

7.2.2.3 The Standing Committees of the Commission should be given increased delegation to address issues. Reports from Standing Committees should be forwarded to Plenary for endorsement on the understanding that such reports and their recommendations have been read by Commission Members. There should be a strong resistance against such reports being reviewed, or matters addressed by these reports being reopened by the Plenary in substance. This should only occur in exceptional circumstances when a Party (or Parties) specifically requests reconsideration of a specific item.

7.2.2.4 Following the example of the ATCM’s CEP, far more work on detailed or technical matters should be delegated by the Standing Committees to subsidiary groups. These may then undertake their work during intersessional periods by electronic or other means. This working method should enable a more focused approach to be undertaken by the Standing Committees at their annual meetings.

7.2.2.5 Discussions in the Commission’s Plenary would also be improved by a more rigorous approach to report content and format. In relation to this, the RP recommended that: (i) a common format for all reports should be adopted; (ii) reports should provide collective and constructive views, rather than particular views from individuals; (iii) executive summaries of conclusions and recommendations should be included; and (iv) more detailed analyses of issues should be confined to annexes.